Technology Needs Assessment - Phase II

Project General Information



Climate change

Climate Change



The project responds directly to Article 4.5 of the UNFCCC, which states, inter-alia, that the “...developed country Parties and other developed Parties included in Annex II shall take practicable steps to promote, facilitate and finance, as appropriate, the transfer of, or access to, environmentally sound technologies and know-how to other Parties, particularly developing country Parties, to enable them to implement the provisions of the Convention. In this process, the developed country Parties shall support the development and enhancement of endogenous capacities and technologies of developing country Parties. Other Parties and organizations in a position to do so may also assist in facilitating the transfer of such technologies.”


The project addresses the same fundamental problem that motivated previous and on-going technology needs assessment efforts – how to accelerate the transfer of environmentally sound technologies to developing country Parties to the UNFCCC.  A closely associated issue is how to specify developing country technology needs and plans in ways that will attract adequate levels of investment and technology flows from developed countries, while bringing benefits in terms of climate mitigation and adaptation for local development goals specifically and sustainable development in general.


Building on lessons learned from previous efforts, the project will address this problem by taking full advantage of the tools, global institutional infrastructure and accumulated knowledge from an ongoing global TNA project, to deploy a significantly improved implementation approach, strategy and tactics of technology transfer.  In particular, it will establish a tighter integration of technology needs assessments, technology action planning and development of specific project proposals, thereby improving multi-stakeholder consultative processes that, in turn, can facilitate the identification and attraction of needed resources for accelerating climate technology transfers.


Taking these lessons into account, project activities will be organized around three basic thematic components:

Component 1:  Enabling technology action planning processes.  Activities in this component will focus primarily on providing technical assistance and funding for countries to assess technology needs, prepare technology action plans, and develop technology transfer pilot projects that meet quality standards and funding criteria of EST promoters, including Annex II country governments and financial institutions interested in climate-friendly technology investments.  Activities will include in-depth analysis of the actual market and trade barriers that hinder the transfer of a prioritized selection of technologies, followed by an assessment of the policy, institutional and finance options to overcome these barriers.


Experience from the on-going TNA project confirms that countries are motivated to take ownership and participate in these activities when stakeholders see a strong possibility for the TNA-TAP process to enhance prospects for attracting investments from public and private sources. This realization has motivated the addition of proposal development into the capacity building elements of the on-going TNA project, including the production of a new guidebook on proposal development and other resources that will be available for use in the proposed project. In the same way, the technology needs assessment and barrier identification/analysis activities envisaged under this component will benefit from an updated, much improved version of the TNA Handbook, as well as a newly developed guidebook on technology transfer barrier analysis. The new handbook will developed on the basis of lessons learned on the ground.


Component 2:  Facilitating implementation of technology action plans, including roll-outs of policy incentives for EST investments, and brokering of technology transfer deals.  The project will support the establishment of specialized institutional mechanisms for ensuring that policy measures documented in technology action plans, including those specifically designed to accelerate investments in EST, are actually implemented.  The basic justification for this component is that, while TAPs will typically describe “WHAT” interventions are needed to address technology transfer barriers, they cannot realistically be expected to fully address the question of “HOW.” Although the current TAP template in the on-going TNA requires countries to answer the question of how, the response is almost invariably indicative at best, given the limited amount of resources at the disposal of countries for this purpose.  They are certainly not sufficiently detailed to guide critical implementation decisions such as resource requirements for implementation.  Experience from other technology transfer initiatives point to gaps on the transition path from plans to actions as critical threats to successful implementation of TAPs.  The proposed project will address this problem by helping countries to create (or where these already exist), strengthen institutional entities, tentatively designated in this proposal as “Implementation Support Agency” (ISA), capable of bridging these gaps to ensure implementation of TAP-defined measures during the project.


While the particulars will clearly differ from country to country, the basic activities under Component 2 will generally be organized around the creation or strengthening of ISAs as the main institutional vehicles by which countries will make the transition from plans to implemented policy measures, technology transfer project deals, and other concrete results.  The project will make funding and technical assistance available to suitably qualified individuals or organizations to design, implement and manage ISAs which may either be deployed as “special units” embedded within existing organizations or as autonomous entities. In either scenario, their core function will be to deliver on request, implementation-focused services and products to government, investors and other stakeholders identified in the TAPs.


Depending on the country context, a typical ISA would be set up to deliver the following services to facilitate implementation of specified measures (e.g. tax incentives for technology transfer deals or projects): (1) preparing detailed specifications of governance arrangements addressing issues such as: who will manage which aspect of the implementation; what decision-making rules and procedures apply and should be taken into account by implementers; (2) assisting the initiators of specific project concepts to develop and deploy Work Breakdown Structures (WBS) linked to TAPs; (3) providing detailed estimates of resources required for implementation of specified actions; (4) providing risk assessment and management services; (5) delivering stakeholder analyses and management services; (6) providing quality assurance services for funders or sponsors of specific measures in the TAP; and (7) identifying opportunities and brokering technology transfer deals consistent with the ruling TAP.


Thus defined, Component 2 will, metaphorically speaking, be the ‘beating heart’ of the EST transfer process which the project will be establishing in each country. Without the set of activities envisaged under this component, most of the TAPs developed by participating countries would suffer the all too common fate of such endeavors in developing countries: ending up as ‘lifeless’ reports.


Component 3:  Networking, communications and outreach for accelerated EST transfers.  Core functions to be operationalized under this component include: the facilitation of technical cooperation agreements in technology transfer at national, regional and global levels.  Special attention will be devoted to fostering interactions between practitioners in the fields of investment/finance, technology and policy. Experience from the current TNA project confirms that getting the finance and technology transfer management communities to start talking to each other early – rather than late – in the technology action process can substantially increase the prospects of finding the right financial product for a given technology.  While ‘traditional’ dissemination events such as workshops and conference will be important tools for diffusion and learning, the project will also selectively employ innovative web applications to augment the knowledge management and disseminating power of these traditional methods.


The project will also attempt, through the networking, communication and outreach activities to help close a substantial gap in global conventions and decisions on technology transfer. For the most part, these decisions emphasize the creation of conditions in developing countries that are conducive to foreign investment and building capabilities to absorb and utilize imported technologies. Less emphasis has been given to measures which governments of technology supplier countries can and should take to facilitate and accelerate technology transfer.  To help address this imbalance, the project will commission special research/studies focusing on the supply-side of the technology transfer equation, and disseminate practical recommendations for consideration by governments of technology supplier countries interested in developing and deploying incentives and other supportive measures.


Decision 11/CP.17, para 2 (Report of the GEF to the COP and additional guidance to the GEF) invites the GEF, “…in the context of technology needs assessments, to continue to provide financial support to other non-Annex I Parties as appropriate to conduct or update their technology needs assessments…” By building on experiences and lessons learned from previous and on-going TNA activities, the proposed project offers an opportunity for the GEF to maximize the cost-effectiveness of its funding on future TNAs.


Selection of countries will be based on criteria including size of the country / economy, mitigation potential, adaptation needs, national interest and enabling environment, expression of interest by countries, past efforts, institutional capacities, etc.  Initial countries will be chosen with a goal of regional diversity.  Armenia, Uruguay, Togo and Democratic Republic of Congo (list of additional countries forthcoming) will likely be amongst the first group of countries to field test some of the improved implementation approaches and tools outlined in preceding paragraphs including the descriptions of Components.  The final list will reflect a good balance of country size, geographic location, degree of industrialization, and importance of adaptation versus mitigation needs.


Each participating country will, with support from the project team, prepare a costed national workplan for conducting activities under the three project Components. The workplan will be based upon a simplified format, but will include timelines, benchmarks, and indicators to show how each output at the national level supports the overall technology transfer planning and concept development process.


Countries will receive grant financing for activities under Components 1 and 2, while qualified regional centers will be engaged to provide much of the technical guidance and support.  Under Component 3, the project will also establish mechanisms that promote exchange of experience and information between countries.  This will not only aid in the preparation of TNA, TAPs and pilot project proposals, but will establish the basis for cooperative arrangements for eventual implementation of measures identified in TAPs. A steering committee will be established to provide strategic guidance to the program on technology transfer.  This committee will be fully linked (if it is not in the CC committee itself) to the national climate change committee structure, thereby facilitating the connection with the UNFCCC focal point and the climate negotiation issues.  This will be further elaborated during the preparatory phase.

Full Size Project(FSP)

Global Multi Country


Burkina Faso, Burundi, Jordan, Honduras, Tanzania, Tunisia, Panama, Togo, Philippines, Turkmenistan, Egypt, Armenia, Guyana, Grenada, Gambia, Swaziland, Madagascar, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Mauritania, Seychelles, Malaysia, Mozambique

GEF Trust Fund

Stage Grant to UNEP Grant to other IA Co-Financing UNEP Fee Other IA Fee
$ 5,815,080.00 $ 0.00 $ 2,036,921.00 $ 552,433.00 $ 0.00


United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)

GEF Staff



Executing Agency Category
UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme)
Multilateral agency

Partner Category
URC (UNEP Risoe Centre )
UNEP Collaborating Center

Name Category Period
GEF Staff

Moderate Risk

The main project risk stems from the importance of having strong country commitment to the TNA-TAP development process in order to achieve useful results. Countries may flag in their enthusiasm for conducting the sort of wide stakeholder engagement necessary for producing a good TNA and achieving consensus on a national technology action plan. National partners may revert to the easier but less useful approach followed by many countries in conducting initial TNAs, which in many cases resulted in a list of technology needs without much analysis of what was needed to realize those technologies.

Not Applicable


Fiscal Year Project activities and objectives met

$ 0.00